It is conventional in the sport of ice hockey, soccer and other similar sports for the participants to wear leg protectors that protect their shin and/or knee areas. Examples of leg protectors are set forth in U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,135,964, 3,735,419, 4,888,826, 4,999,847 and 5,611,080. The entire contents of each of these patents is incorporated herein by reference, as if fully set forth herein. Furthermore, for those occupations where the worker must frequently kneel, such as in floor tile or wood flooring work, the protection of the leg of the worker is needed for sustained and comfortable kneeling without injury to the leg.
Leg protectors have conventionally employed a rigid outer shell generally comprised of one or more interconnected outer shell components that are positioned to overlie shock absorbent padding. The shock absorbent padding is suitably attached usually by stitches or rivets to the outer shell component(s) so as to lie in direct contact with the wearer's leg. When a force or impact is received by the outer shell the underlying shock padding functions to attenuate the given force or impact.
In some leg protectors, the shock absorbent padding and outer shell component(s) are in spaced attachment so as to create an air cavity between the outer shell and the shock absorbent padding. The spaced attachment of the shock absorbent padding to the outer shell functions as a cantilever mechanism. In operation, a force applied against the rigid outer shell at a point above the air cavity transfers the force to the shock absorbent padding and flexes the shock absorbent padding relative to the rigid outer shell. Such a force may stem from an impact by a hockey stick, puck, soccer ball or the like. The result is that the force is absorbed by the flexing and the shock absorbent qualities of the padding and is dissipated across the area of the wearer's leg underlying the shock absorbent padding.
A consequence of the force induced flexing of the cantilever mechanism construction is a reduction in the air cavity. FIG. 12A illustrates the air cavity 4 of a cantilever mechanism when no force is applied. In contrast, FIG. 12B illustrates the reduction of the air cavity 4 of the cantilever mechanism when force is applied. FIGS. 12A and 12B specifically illustrate a top cross-sectional view of the leg of the wearer 1, the shock absorbent padding 2 that is attached to the peripheral of the rigid outer shell component 3 along the lateral and medial sides of the leg, and an air cavity 4 generally positioned between the rigid outer shell 3 and the shock absorbent padding 2.
A disadvantage of this type of design is that the shin-knee and the shin-ankle transition areas of the wearer's leg are not well protected because the cantilever mechanism tends to "bottom out" in those regions. The term "shin-knee transition area" is defined to mean the area of the leg generally below the patella that in a kneeling position would contact the surface upon which the leg is kneeling. Bottoming out occurs when a force on the rigid outer shell results in the shock absorbent padding traversing the air cavity to directly abut against the inner surface of the rigid outer shell component. As a consequence, the force dissipating affect that would otherwise be accomplished by the cantilever mechanism is not fully effective.
The bottoming out problem is of further concern along and near the longitudinal stitch lines where the shock absorbent padding is attached to the rigid outer shell component(s). In those regions the depth of the air cavity just anterior to the lateral and medial sides of the wearer's leg are small in comparison to the depth of the air cavity along the front side of the wearer's leg. Thus, a force or impact blow to the outer shell is more likely to bottom out the cantilever in those regions.
A cantilever type construction, that simply increases or varies the tension and/or rigidity of the shock absorbent padding with respect to the rigid outer shell component(s) is not an effective solution for at least the following three reasons. First, it would add increased complexity to design and manufacture and as a consequence increase the manufacturing costs. Second, it would increase the bulkiness of the leg protector thereby tending to hamper the agility and mobility of the wearer. Third, the increased rigidity would, in this type of construction, directly diminish the effective absorption of a given force or impact.
The bottoming out problem is typically of concern at the bottom and top ends of the shin portion of the leg protector (i.e. the shin-knee transition and the shin-ankle transition) because the cantilever mechanism construction loses rigidity when approaching the ends of the rigid outer shell components. This is further aggravated by the fact that those transition regions tend to have relatively less muscle tissue to absorb a force. The concern with bottoming out is particularly acute in the shin-knee transition area of the leg because, unlike the shin-ankle transition area, the shin-knee transition area of the leg protrudes outwardly relative to the lower portion of the shin. Furthermore, the shin-knee transition area is typically the area directly impacted when the wearer is in a kneeling position due to a fall on the shin(s) to a hard surface or alternatively when the wearer is kneeling, perhaps to lay floor tile.
Apparently cognizant of this problem, some have stitched or attached the top and bottom ends of the shock absorbent padding to the rigid outer shell component to provide added rigidity to the cantilever mechanism. However, this construction simply results in the reduction of the relative size of the area where the cantilever mechanism is susceptible to bottoming out and, thus, does not eliminate the problem. Furthermore, any force to the stitched areas, regardless of magnitude, is directly absorbed by the padding and consequently the underlying leg rather than being dissipated via the cantilever mechanism.
Alternatively, others, perhaps also cognizant of these concerns, have provided additional shock absorbent padding in the shin-knee transition area. While the added padding, to a certain degree, may attenuate a given blow or force, it nevertheless directly transfers the blow or force to the underlying bones and joints often causing pain and/or bone or joint damage to the wearer. Furthermore, providing additional padding tends to both move the outer shell component further from the wearer's leg and increase the bulk of the leg protector. As a result, the wearer's agility and mobility on the playing arena or in the work environment is hampered.
Consequently, a need exists for an improved limb protector that can adequately protect the limb of the wearer.